Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: El Sordo
As long as we are clear that you see the evaluation of conclusive evidence as just following the herd.

Completely to the contrary. It is the knee jerk reaction to inconclusive evidence which prompted people to follow the herd.

The newspaper announcements do not PROVE birth in Hawaii. They prove that a birth record was filed at this time, in Hawaii. Most people equate the one thing with the other, and initially I was one of them, but after people pointed out to me how PECULIAR Hawaii's birth certificate laws are, I realized that a newspaper notice cannot be a substitute for a sworn affidavit of birth, and as of yet, Obama has not produced a satisfactory one.

So as I said, there was no "evaluation of conclusive evidence", there was a rush to assume that a notice in a newspaper is acceptable legal proof that someone was born in Hawaii. It. Is. Not.

345 posted on 09/13/2011 6:34:25 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Adam Smith and Edmund Burke; Synergistic philosophies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

Well, good luck with that.


346 posted on 09/13/2011 9:27:32 AM PDT by El Sordo (The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson